Global warming scholarly articles

Global Warming Is Real and Has Consequences – Part I

March 17, 2016 – 09:19 pm

Although the consequences of global warming are painfully vivid, some scholars still question whether it requires urgent action. In January, a group of scientists, including those from the United States, Australia, France and the Netherlands, summarized reasons for their skepticism and opposition to findings of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. They insist that evidence is lacking to show the world is warming. Citing research of William D. Nordhaus, Yale professor of economics, they maintain that delaying action on climate change for 50 years would impose no serious economic consequences and could even offer benefits to less developed nations as they catch up with developed economies. In part one of this YaleGlobal series, Nordhaus responds to the essay, pointing out faults in the skeptics’ review of climate modeling, temperature trends and basic cost-benefit analysis. The skeptics contend that uncertainties do not warrant alarm or huge investments to launch a transition away from fossil fuels. Nordhaus counters that taking steps to slow climate change won’t result in economic catastrophe, concluding, “The claim that cap-and-trade legislation or carbon taxes would be ruinous to our society does not stand up to serious economic analysis.” – YaleGlobal

Yale economist refutes climate-change skeptics who use his research to recommend standing pat

NEW HAVEN: A January 27 opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal by a group of 16 scientists, “No Need to Panic About Global Warming, ” contained many of the standard criticisms of climate skeptics in a succinct statement. The essay argued that the globe is not warming and delaying policies to slow climate change for 50 years will have no serious consequences.

At a time when we need to clarify public confusion about the science and economics of climate change, the 16 scientists have muddied the waters. Here, I describe some of their mistakes.

Their first claim is that the planet is not warming. More precisely, “Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now.”

No. The global temperature has gone DOWN since 1998 despite an increase in man made CO2. To waste billions or trillions on something that is only a THEORY is pretty ridiculous. The alarmist will tell you that you need 15, no 20, no 30, no 50 years to establish a temperature trend even though their theory is that CO2 drives temperature. Every year that passes while global temperatures go down just increases people's rightful skepticism and they will become less and less inclined to throw good money after bad on this hoax.

What are the solution of global warming?

The solution couldn't be simpler. Stop use of fossil fuels, aerosols and cutting down of forests.Executing this a little trickier.